Mental Well-Being of University Students in the Context of Academic Pressure and Coping Strategies

Introduction

The period of university study represents a developmentally critical phase that connects late adolescence with early adulthood and brings complex academic, social, and developmental challenges (Solmi et al., 2022). It is a period of identity formation, autonomy, and professional orientation, in which students learn to regulate their own behavior, assume responsibility, and effectively handle increasing demands of the environment (Murray & Arnett, 2018). University life also represents a specific context in which a high degree of independence, self-discipline, and academic performance is expected of the individual (Tayoto, 2025). These expectations, however, can be accompanied by substantial academic pressure, which often becomes a source of stress, anxiety, and reduced subjective well-being (Owen et al., 2025). Academic stress is among the most frequently reported stressors in university students’ lives. It is mainly related to high performance requirements, time pressure, exam periods, or uncertainty regarding future careers (Martincová & Bíla, 2023; Pascoe et al., 2020). Long-term exposure to such demands can negatively affect students’ mental health and reduce their subjective psychological well-being.

Coping strategies play a significant role in managing academic stress. They are ways in which individuals respond to stressful situations and try to handle them (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). The choice of coping strategies can determine whether stress leads to adaptation and personal growth or to psychological exhaustion and reduced well-being.

Based on these findings, current research increasingly focuses on the study of the relationships between academic stress, coping methods, and the psychological well-being of university students.

Theory

Psychological well-being

In most cases, the period of university study overlaps with emerging adulthood, usually defined as approximately between ages 18 and 25 (Arnett, 2000). It is a developmental period characterized by identity formation, unstable life circumstances, increasing independence, and a gradual transition toward more permanent life commitments (Machovcová et al., 2024).

Key developmental tasks of this period include mainly the formation of personal and value identity, building autonomy from parents and family, and the gradual choice of a professional path. Young adults in this period often experiment with different social roles, relationships, and academic and career directions while learning to take responsibility for their own decisions and outcomes (Macek et al., 2016).

University life also brings specific demands. Requirements for independent organization of learning, time, and finances often increase, frequently associated with leaving the home environment (Cheng, 2025). Academic performance is accompanied by increased pressure in the form of demanding examinations, competition, and uncertainty about future employment, which can contribute to higher levels of stress (Xu & Chai, 2025). At the same time, major social and adjustment changes occur, such as building new relationships, integrating into student communities, or dealing with feelings of loneliness, especially for students studying outside their home region (Machovcová et al., 2024). Current research points to a relatively high prevalence of anxiety, depression, stress, and sleep problems among university students (Vásquez et al., 2026). These difficulties may be associated with reduced academic performance, increased risk of dropping out, and generally lower life quality (Berka & Marek, 2021). Psychological well-being (well-being), which includes a subjective sense of satisfaction, meaningfulness, and the ability to cope with life demands, therefore represents a significant prerequisite for optimal functioning in both academic and personal life (Parová, 2025).

Academic stress among university students

Academic stress is a specific form of stress that is closely linked to the university environment and the demands associated with study. Chronic stress can lead to various health problems and negatively affect both physical and mental health (Sedláková, 2021). In the context of higher education, stress is often linked to academic demands, performance evaluation, and expectations regarding future career placement (Martincová & Bíla, 2023).

Stress can be defined on Lazarus’s transactional model as a state in which environmental demands exceed an individual’s abilities and resources to handle them. It is not any load, but one that is subjectively experienced as overwhelming (Schreiber, 1992). Stress arises as the result of interaction between the individual and the environment, with individual appraisal playing an important role. While short-term stress can have a mobilizing character, long-term exposure leads to negative psychological and health consequences (Večeřová-Prochádzková & Honzák, 2009).

Academic stress is among the major factors affecting students’ mental health and psychological well-being and may also contribute to premature study completion (Majerová & Sokolová, 2025). Among its most common sources are high academic load, pressure for performance, and demanding content (Martincová & Bíla, 2023). Examinations and various forms of performance assessment are also significant stressors and are often reported by students as one of the most demanding parts of academic life (Majerová & Sokolová, 2025).

An important factor is also time pressure and the difficulty of time organization (Majerová & Sokolová, 2025). Many students face problems in reconciling study, work, and personal life, which can increase their stress and negatively affect academic performance (Pérez-Jorge et al., 2025; Tescon et al., 2025). Inadequate time-management skills and high academic demands represent significant stressors in the academic environment (Deng et al., 2022). Worries about future employment and uncertainty related to career paths also contribute to students’ psychological burden (Islam et al., 2025).

Long-term exposure to academic stress can have negative consequences for students’ mental health (Martincová & Bíla, 2023). Research indicates a relationship between higher stress and the occurrence of anxiety, depression, and academic burnout, which manifests as emotional exhaustion, cynical attitudes toward study, and a sense of insufficient personal performance (Dyrbye et al., 2006; Salmela-Aro & Read, 2017). Excessive stress also negatively affects overall student psychological well-being, which can appear as lower life satisfaction, sleep problems, or use of less adaptive ways of handling demand (Beiter et al., 2015; Pascoe et al., 2020).

Coping strategies

Coping strategies represent an important mechanism through which individuals respond to stressful situations and try to manage environmental demands. Coping can be defined as a set of cognitive and behavioral efforts focused on managing, reducing, or tolerating internal and external demands that are perceived by the individual as burdensome or exceeding their resources. In Lazarus and Folkman’s transactional stress model, coping is understood as a dynamic process that depends on the individual’s appraisal of the stressful situation and available coping resources (Halamová et al., 2022).

According to this model, coping occurs through two core appraisal processes. In primary appraisal, the individual evaluates whether the situation is a threat, a challenge, or a neutral event. In secondary appraisal, they then consider what resources and coping options they have available. On the basis of these processes, specific coping strategies are then activated, which may be either problem-focused or emotional response regulation (Halamová et al., 2022).

In professional literature, two main categories of coping strategies are distinguished most frequently. The first group is problem-focused strategies (problem-focused coping), whose goal is to directly solve or reduce the stressor (Lazarus & Folkman, 1985). These include, for example, active problem solving, planning next steps, gathering information, or seeking social support (Dimunová & Bérešová, 2015). The second group is emotion-focused coping, which is focused on regulating emotional responses to the stressful situation and alleviating the subjective experience of stress. This includes, for example, calming, positive reappraisal, or finding meaning in the situation (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).

In addition to adaptive coping strategies, maladaptive forms are also described in the literature, which can lower tension in the short term but in the long term do not contribute to solving the stress situation and may negatively affect the individual’s psychological well-being. These include avoidance of the stressor, self-criticism, or denial of reality (Carver et al., 1989).

Research shows that the choice of coping strategies significantly affects how individuals respond to stress and what consequences stress has for their mental health. Adaptive problem-solving strategies are linked with better psychological adaptation and lower levels of emotional difficulties, while avoidant or maladaptive strategies are typically associated with increased anxiety and depressive symptoms (Compas et al., 2001; Penley, Tomaka & Wiebe, 2002; Carver & Connor-Smith, 2010). Development of adaptive strategies, such as problem solving or seeking social support, therefore represents a major protective factor in stress management (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2004).

Relationship between stress, coping, and psychological well-being

Research points to a significant connection between the intensity of experienced stress and the psychological well-being of university students. Chronic stress has a demonstrable negative effect on well-being and can lead to various forms of psychological strain. Empirical studies also confirm a positive relationship between academic stress and burnout syndrome. Excessive academic workload is associated with increased physical and psychological symptoms, especially anxiety and depression, and in some cases may even lead to thoughts of early study termination (del Pino & Matud, 2024).

Coping strategies play an important role in handling academic stress. They represent the cognitive and behavioral efforts of the individual to manage or reduce the stressful situation. Studies show that problem-oriented and active coping strategies are associated with better academic outcomes and more efficient adaptation to academic demands (Freire et al., 2016). In contrast, avoidant strategies are more often connected with higher stress and lower academic success. Coping strategies also influence subjective satisfaction with studying and students’ overall psychological well-being (Dorado Barbé et al., 2025).

Research also points to gender differences in stress experience and coping choice. Women tend to experience higher levels of academic stress and more often use emotion-focused strategies, such as seeking social support or emotional venting (Rojas-Ruiz et al., 2024). Men, by contrast, more often prefer problem-focused strategies. These differences suggest that gender may play a significant role in how stressful situations are managed (Freire et al., 2016).

On the basis of these findings, it is possible to assume that stress management style is an important factor influencing university students’ psychological well-being. Therefore, studying the relationship between perceived academic stress, coping strategies, and psychological well-being represents a significant area of study in the context of student mental health.

Research aim

The aim of this study was to examine the relationships between perceived academic stress, coping strategies, and psychological well-being of university students at the beginning of the academic semester. The study focused on how the level of perceived stress related to students’ well-being and what role coping strategies played in this relationship. It was hypothesized that adaptive strategies, such as planning or seeking social support, would be associated with higher psychological well-being, whereas maladaptive coping styles, such as avoidance or self-criticism, would reduce well-being and increase stress. At the same time, it was tested whether coping strategies softened the negative impact of academic stress on well-being and whether differences in these variables existed by gender.

To meet the aim, we set the following hypotheses: H1: We assumed that there is a negative correlation between perceived academic stress level and psychological well-being level in university students. H2: We assumed that more frequent use of adaptive coping strategies will be positively correlated with a higher level of psychological well-being. H3: We assumed that more frequent use of maladaptive coping strategies will be negatively correlated with psychological well-being and positively correlated with perceived stress level. H4: We hypothesized that coping strategies would weaken the negative relationship between perceived stress and psychological well-being, with adaptive strategies weakening the influence of stress on well-being. H5: We assumed that statistically significant differences in perceived stress level, preferred coping strategies, and psychological well-being level would exist depending on gender.

Research methods

The research was carried out in a quantitative form using a questionnaire design. Because official Slovak versions were absent, all used questionnaires were translated by the author from the English original into Slovak using a consensus translation method. Two psychologists with knowledge of English participated in the translation, and content and linguistic equivalence of the items were preserved. The translated versions of the questionnaires were pretested in a small group of students before use to assess item comprehensibility. Although the tools were not fully standardized in the Slovak context, they are internationally established scales with extensive empirical use in research on academic stress and psychological well-being. Data collection was conducted in the first weeks of the first semester of the 2025/2026 academic year. Data were collected through an online questionnaire created on Google Forms. The questionnaire was distributed in cooperation with faculty heads, study program coordinators, and student representative organizations, who conveyed it to their students through internal communication channels. This ensured broad representation of respondents from different study fields, universities, and regions. All phases of the research were carried out in line with ethical principles of psychological research and the American Psychological Association (APA) ethical code (APA, 2010). Participation was voluntary; before data collection began, participants were informed about the purpose, procedure, and anonymity of the research, as well as data processing, and this represented a form of implicit informed consent because continuing the questionnaire confirmed that participants were sufficiently informed and agreed to participate. Data were processed exclusively for research purposes and in anonymized form, in line with personal data protection principles and ethical standards in psychological research.

Collected data were processed and analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics (version 26). In the analysis, composite scores were calculated for each scale—psychological well-being (Ryff PWB-18), perceived stress (PSS-10), and three coping strategy factors (Brief COPE). Basic descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation, range, skewness, kurtosis) were calculated and normality of the variables was tested using the Shapiro–Wilk test. Because not all variables met normality assumptions, nonparametric procedures were used when testing relationships (Spearman correlation coefficient). To test hypotheses about the relationships between stress, coping strategies, and psychological well-being, correlation and regression analyses were applied sequentially. Moderating effects of coping strategies were analyzed through hierarchical linear regression including interaction terms. Gender group differences were tested using the independent-samples Student t-test. The significance level was set at α = 0,05, with all tests two-sided. Despite slight deviations from normality, the Student t-test was used because of the large sample size, which allows use of parametric tests even with partial violations of normality assumptions.

Ryff PWB-18

Psychological well-being was measured using Ryff’s Psychological Well-Being Scale (Ryff Scales of Psychological Well-Being – PWB-18; Ryff & Keyes, 1995), which is based on a eudaimonic model of well-being. This approach emphasizes positive functioning, self-realization, and meaningful living as the core of mental health. The scale consists of 18 items capturing six dimensions of psychological well-being: self-acceptance, positive relations, autonomy, environmental mastery, life meaning, and personal growth. Respondents rated agreement with individual statements on a six-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 6 = strongly agree), where higher scores indicate a higher level of psychological well-being. This instrument was selected for its theoretical anchoring in the eudaimonic well-being concept, high empirical evidence, and suitability for studies focused on quality of psychological functioning in the academic population. Previous studies report satisfactory internal consistency of the scale, with Cronbach’s α for the shortened version PWB-18 usually ranging from approximately 0,70 to 0,80 depending on the population (Ryff & Keyes, 1995).

Brief COPE

Coping strategies were measured with the Brief COPE questionnaire (Carver, 1997), which is a shortened version of the original COPE Inventory (Carver et al., 1989). The instrument is based on Lazarus and Folkman’s transactional model of stress coping (1984) and self-regulation theory (Carver & Scheier, 1990). Brief COPE was developed as a compact, time-efficient version for use in applied research while retaining the original theoretical structure. The questionnaire includes 28 items that form 14 subscales (two items in each): active coping, planning, positive reinterpretation, acceptance, humor, religious coping, emotional and instrumental support use, self-distraction, denial, emotional venting, substance use, behavioral disengagement, and self-blame. Respondents answered on a four-point Likert scale (0 = “not at all,” 3 = “very often”), which reflects how frequently each strategy is used in demanding or stressful situations. In line with Carver’s (1997) recommendations, the subscales in this study were grouped into three coping areas: adaptive (problem-focused), emotional (emotion-focused), and maladaptive strategies. Higher scores in each category indicate more frequent use of that type of coping behavior. The choice of this instrument was motivated by its empirically validated validity, suitability for research in academic stress, and time efficiency, which enables effective use in online settings. Given its demonstrated sensitivity to individual differences in handling stress, Brief COPE is a suitable and methodologically reliable instrument for a student population. Brief COPE shows good internal consistency of individual subscales in various studies, with Cronbach’s alpha values typically between approximately 0,60 and 0,90 (Carver, 1997).

PSS-10

Perceived stress level was measured using the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10; Cohen et al., 1983). This instrument evaluates the extent to which an individual perceives situations in daily life as unpredictable, uncontrollable, and overwhelming, and it is based on Richard Lazarus’s transactional stress model (1966). The questionnaire contains 10 items that map the frequency of stressful experiences during the last month. Respondents answered on a five-point Likert scale (0 = “never,” 4 = “very often”), where higher scores express a higher level of subjective stress. The shortened PSS-10 has shown high internal consistency (α = 0,84 – 0,86) and good convergent and discriminant validity (Cohen et al., 1983). This instrument was chosen because of its ease of administration, psychometric reliability, and suitability for capturing subjective academic stress in a higher education population. Internal consistency of the used scales was tested using Cronbach’s alpha. The values for each instrument are shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Reliability of the scales used in the research sample

Internal consistency of the used scales was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha. Most scales showed acceptable to good reliability. Lower reliability values in some subscales may relate to the small number of items (3 items), which is common in the shortened PWB-18 version.

Characteristics of the research sample

The research sample consisted of 561 university students studying at various universities and faculties in Slovakia and the Czech Republic. Inclusion criteria were active full-time study at bachelor, master, or doctoral level.

In terms of gender, women made up the majority of the sample (62,4 %; n = 350), while men accounted for 37,6 % (n = 211). Participants’ age range was from 18 to 32 years (M = 22,2; SD = 2,1), with students aged 21–23 years most numerous.

By level of higher education, 70,4 % of respondents were studying at bachelor level, 25 % at master’s or engineering level, and 4,6 % at doctoral level. All respondents studied in full-time mode.

By field of study, students in humanities and social sciences dominated (39,6 %), mainly in psychology and social work. Other represented areas were economic sciences (17,3 %), educational fields (11,8 %), technical sciences (9,4 %), legal sciences (1,2 %), natural and mathematical fields (8,2 %), and medical and health fields (7,1 %). A smaller part of the sample consisted of students of arts and artistic directions (5,3 %).

In terms of workload alongside study, 39,6 % of respondents reported not working, 33,3 % worked part-time up to 20 hours per week, 22,1 % had a regular side job, and 5 % worked full-time.

The research sample can be characterized as large and heterogeneous in sociodemographic characteristics. The sample was a convenience sample, which may limit generalizability.

Research results

The aim of the study was to analyze relationships between psychological well-being, perceived academic stress, and coping strategies used for managing demand among university students. IBM SPSS Statistics (version 26) was used to process data. The significance level was set at α = 0,05. Normality of variable distributions was verified through the Shapiro-Wilkov test, with nonparametric tests (Spearman correlation coefficient) applied where distributions were non-normal.

Relationship between psychological well-being and perceived academic stress (H1)

Correlation analysis confirmed a moderately strong negative relationship between the level of psychological well-being and perceived academic stress (rs = -0,51; p < 0,001). Higher stress level was associated with lower psychological well-being. This result is statistically significant and confirms hypothesis H1. The finding shows that students who perceive their academic stress as higher tend to experience lower satisfaction, meaning in life, and overall mental well-being.

Figure 1: Relationship between perceived academic stress and psychological well-being of university students

Relationship between adaptive coping strategies and psychological well-being (H2)

Analysis of the relationship between psychological well-being and adaptive coping strategies revealed a weak but statistically significant positive correlation between well-being and problem-focused strategies (rs = 0,25; p < 0,001). This finding suggests that students who, when dealing with demands, prioritize active problem solving and planning tend to achieve a higher level of psychological well-being. By contrast, no statistically significant relationship was found between psychological well-being and emotion-focused coping strategies (rs = -0,03; p = 0,447). Use of these strategies, therefore, is not associated with either higher or lower psychological well-being among the examined students. Hypothesis H2 was therefore partially confirmed, only for problem-focused strategies. This finding can be interpreted as emotional coping (e.g., venting, acceptance, or searching for emotional support) may not directly increase psychological well-being, although it may contribute to immediate reduction of subjective tension.

Figure 2: Relationship between problem-focused coping strategies and psychological well-being

Figure 3: Relationship between emotion-focused coping strategies and psychological well-being

Relationship between maladaptive coping strategies, stress, and psychological well-being (H3)

The results indicate a moderately strong negative correlation between maladaptive coping strategies and psychological well-being (rs = -0,44; p < 0,001), meaning that more frequent use of ineffective forms of coping (e.g., avoidance, self-criticism, denial, or escape behavior) is associated with lower well-being. A moderately strong positive correlation between maladaptive coping strategies and perceived stress was also confirmed (rs = 0,52; p < 0,001), that is, students who use these strategies more often tend to perceive higher academic stress. Hypothesis H3 was fully confirmed by these results. The data show that the quality of coping mechanisms significantly affects how students respond to academic demands. Maladaptive strategies can temporarily reduce tension but over time may lead to exhaustion, lower satisfaction, and reduced psychological well-being.

Figure 4: Relationship between maladaptive coping strategies and psychological well-being level

Figure 5: Relationship between maladaptive coping strategies and level of perceived academic stress

Moderating role of coping strategies in the relationship between stress and psychological well-being (H4)

To test the moderating effect of coping strategies, multiple linear regression analysis was used, which sequentially tested three models—for problem-focused strategies, emotion-focused strategies, and maladaptive strategies. In all three models, a significant negative impact of perceived stress on psychological well-being was confirmed, meaning that as stress level increases, students’ well-being decreases (p < 0,001). Furthermore, coping strategies focused on problem-solving were found to be significantly positively related to higher psychological well-being (β = 0,236; p < 0,001). This confirms that students who more frequently use active, problem-oriented strategies tend to show higher levels of psychological well-being. Emotion-focused coping strategies had a weak but statistically significant positive effect on well-being (β = 0,089; p = 0,022), suggesting that emotional regulation may slightly support subjective well-being.

On the other hand, maladaptive coping strategies were negatively associated with psychological well-being (β = -0,242; p < 0,001). Students who in demanding situations choose escape, denial, or self-criticism achieved a lower level of well-being. Conversely, interaction effects between stress and coping strategies (stress × coping) were not statistically significant in any model (p > 0,05). This means coping strategies did not moderate the relationship between stress and psychological well-being, so they did not change its strength or direction. Although coping strategies alone significantly influence well-being, they cannot weaken the negative effect of stress. The findings therefore show that higher stress is linked to lower psychological well-being, while adaptive coping strategies (especially those focused on problem solving) directly support well-being but do not buffer the effect of stress.

Gender differences (H5)

Analysis of gender differences using the Student t-test revealed several statistically significant differences. Women reported higher perceived stress (M = 21,90; SD = 7,13) than men (M = 16,63; SD = 6,93), t(559) = - 8,563; p < 0,001. Men reached slightly higher psychological well-being (M = 88,75; SD = 15,66) than women (M = 86,02; SD = 15,69), t(559) = 1,995; p = 0,047. In coping strategies, several gender differences were confirmed. Women used emotional-focused strategies more often (M = 2,64) than men (M = 2,44), and this difference was statistically significant, t(559) = - 4,952; p < 0,001. Maladaptive strategies were also more frequent among women (M = 1,90) than men (M = 1,78), t(559) = –2,751; p = 0,006. In contrast, differences in use of problem-focused strategies between genders were not statistically significant (p = 0,072).

Hypothesis H5 was therefore partially confirmed. These findings suggest that women in our sample reported higher levels of perceived stress, which may be linked to stronger emotional involvement and different ways of stress management, given that women more frequently use emotional-oriented strategies. In contrast, men reported slightly higher psychological well-being on average, which does not necessarily mean lower stress, but may reflect different ways of perceiving and interpreting demanding situations.

Study findings indicate that perceived academic stress is significantly related to students’ psychological well-being (rs = -0,51; p < 0,001) and that the quality of coping strategies used plays an important role in this relationship. Adaptive problem-focused strategies were associated with higher well-being (rs = 0,25; p < 0,001), while maladaptive strategies showed negative links to well-being (rs = -0,44; p < 0,001) and positive links to stress (rs = 0,52; p < 0,001). Although coping strategies did not buffer the direct effect of stress on well-being, their importance lay in supporting resilience and effective self-regulation. Gender differences were also found: women experienced higher stress and used emotional and maladaptive strategies more often, while men had slightly higher psychological well-being. These findings suggest the need to consider gender differences when designing preventive and intervention programs in academic settings that would support development of effective coping strategies and strengthen student well-being.

Discussion

The aim of the present study was to explore the relationships between psychological well-being, perceived academic stress, and coping strategies of university students. We worked from the assumption that academic pressure is a significant stressor in student life, and that the quality of coping mechanisms may modify its impact on psychological well-being.

Our results showed that higher levels of perceived stress are associated with lower psychological well-being, confirming the theoretical premises of Lazarus and Folkman’s transactional stress model (1984) and prior empirical findings. At the same time, it was confirmed that adaptive coping strategies, especially problem-focused ones, are related to higher levels of psychological well-being, while maladaptive and avoidant strategies weaken well-being and increase subjective stress.

Although expected, the moderating effect of coping strategies on the relationship between stress and psychological well-being was not confirmed, suggesting that effective coping may contribute to better mental functioning, but its influence may not be strong enough to weaken the impact of intensely perceived stress.

From these findings, the first inference is the relationship between perceived stress and psychological well-being, which formed the core of the first hypothesis. In it, we assumed that higher perceived academic stress would be associated with lower psychological well-being. This assumption was grounded in the transactional model of stress (Lazarus & Folkman 1984), which emphasizes that stress arises when an individual appraises environmental demands as exceeding their coping resources. The analysis confirmed this assumption because a moderately strong negative relationship was found between perceived stress and psychological well-being (rs = -0,51; p < 0,001). Higher stress was therefore associated with lower satisfaction, meaningfulness, and overall mental balance. This finding is consistent with previous studies that repeatedly confirm academic stress as a major risk factor for student well-being (e.g., Klainin-Yobas et al., 2021; Marques et al., 2021; Eriksson, 2023). Our results confirm that subjective experience of academic stress is closely linked with reduced psychological well-being and point to the importance of overload prevention and support for students’ resilience in academic environments.

In the second hypothesis we assumed that more frequent use of adaptive coping strategies would be associated with higher levels of psychological well-being. This assumption was based on the transactional model of stress coping (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), according to which effective problem-focused strategies support stress handling and increase subjective sense of control. Analysis confirmed this relationship only partially—psychological well-being positively correlated with problem-focused strategies (rs = 0,25; p < 0,001), while the relationship with emotion-focused strategies was not statistically significant (rs = -0,03; p = 0,447). This finding suggests that active, problem-oriented stress coping contributes to higher psychological well-being, while emotionally focused strategies have rather a supportive, but not direct long-term well-being effect. Moreno-Montero et al. (2024) also confirmed that adaptive strategies, such as cognitive restructuring or seeking social support, mediate the positive relationship between psychological capital and psychological well-being. García-Jiménez et al. (2024) found that problem-focused strategies, such as planning and solving problems, make a significant contribution to psychological well-being and lower stress. Similarly, Mayordomo-Rodríguez et al. (2014) showed that emotion-focused coping strategies, by contrast, can decrease psychological well-being because they provide only short-term relief without a long-term adaptive function. Our results therefore confirm that effective stress coping through active, problem-focused strategies represents a major protective factor for students’ mental health, while emotional coping appears less effective for maintaining long-term psychological balance.

In the third hypothesis, we assumed that more frequent use of maladaptive coping strategies would negatively correlate with psychological well-being and positively with perceived stress. This assumption was based on knowledge of non-adaptive forms of coping, which although they may temporarily reduce tension, increase psychological burden and risk of exhaustion in the long term (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). The analysis fully confirmed this hypothesis. Maladaptive strategies correlated negatively with psychological well-being (rs = -0,44; p < 0,001) and positively with stress (rs = 0,52; p < 0,001). Students who more frequently used avoidant or self-blaming forms of coping experienced higher stress and lower well-being. This relationship indicates that the quality of coping mechanisms significantly influences how students respond to academic demands. Similar results are reported in several studies. Huang et al. (2025) showed that maladaptive strategies, such as avoidance or denial, are associated with higher psychological strain and lower well-being. Barret et al. (2024) confirmed that avoidant coping strategies in medical students lead to lower psychological well-being and lower performance. Similarly, Moreno-Montero et al. (2024) and other mental health studies among students report that self-blame and escapist behavior increase distress risk and weaken resilience to academic pressure. Therefore, our results align with these findings and confirm that maladaptive strategies are a risk factor for student mental health because instead of solving the problem they deepen stress and reduce psychological well-being.

In the fourth hypothesis, we assumed that coping strategies would moderate the negative relationship between perceived stress and psychological well-being, with adaptive strategies reducing stress effects on well-being. This was not confirmed. Although a significant negative stress-well-being relationship was found, coping strategies did not moderate that relationship. Adaptive strategies, especially problem-focused ones, had a direct positive effect on well-being, while maladaptive strategies were negatively related to it. The lack of moderation can also be interpreted as coping strategies contributing to better psychological functioning, yet at higher levels of academic stress they may not be strong enough to reduce its negative impact on well-being. Similar findings were reported in other research. Huang et al. (2025) and de la Fuente et al. (2023) confirmed that active stress coping contributes to greater life satisfaction but does not act as a dampener of stress’s negative effect. Yotsidi et al. (2023) also found that developing positive psychological resources, such as resilience or gratitude, increases subjective well-being but without a moderating effect. The absence of moderation can be explained by persistently high stress and academic workload, which may exceed students’ adaptation capacity (Kohls et al., 2023; Bersia et al., 2024). In line with conservation of resources theory (Hobfoll, 1989), it can be assumed that prolonged stress leads to depletion of psychological resources, weakening the regulatory role of coping mechanisms. Our findings therefore suggest that coping strategies influence psychological well-being directly, not as moderators of the relationship with stress. Adaptive coping forms support well-being, but to reduce stress’s negative impact, strengthening internal resources and social support is also necessary. The absence of moderation can also be interpreted in the context of the academic culture of Slovak and Czech universities, where high performance demands and low levels of systemic mental health support persist. In such an environment, individual coping strategies may encounter limits to their effectiveness.

In the fifth hypothesis, we assumed that differences in perceived stress, psychological well-being, and coping strategies would exist by gender. This was partially supported. Women reported higher stress and used emotional and maladaptive strategies more often, while men achieved slightly higher psychological well-being. Similar findings are reported in multiple studies. Müller et al. (2022) and Barbayannis et al. (2022) confirmed that women experience higher stress, anxiety, and psychological burden than men, who simultaneously show higher self-appraisal and engagement. Theodoratou et al. (2023) found that women more frequently use emotional and social coping strategies, while men more often adopt problem-focused approaches. These differences may be related to social role and greater emotional engagement of women. Our findings thus confirm gender as a significant factor in stress experience and coping strategy selection. For women, it is therefore appropriate to specifically support the development of adaptive coping skills and strengthen psychological resources that contribute to long-term psychological well-being.

Findings from our study offer several practical implications for academic environments and psychological practice. The confirmed negative relationship between perceived stress and psychological well-being indicates the need for systematic support of students’ mental health. Results also suggest that universities should pay greater attention to systematic mental health support for students through programs aimed at developing adaptive coping strategies and preventing academic stress. Programs that appear effective include the development of adaptive coping strategies, stress management psychoeducation, and strengthening psychological resources such as self-efficacy, resilience, and social support. Given the identified gender differences, these interventions should have a gender-sensitive character, for example, strengthening active and problem-focused strategies in female students and promoting emotional openness and seeking social support in male students.

The results also highlight the importance of university counseling centers, which can play a key role in preventing psychological strain. It is also appropriate to develop group programs or peer activities focused on coping with academic stress and building resilience in the student community.

Despite these findings, the study has several limitations. The first is the use of self-report questionnaires, which are prone to social desirability bias. The second limitation is the cross-sectional design, which does not allow causal conclusions about relationships among the studied variables. Another limitation is unbalanced gender representation in the sample, which may affect the generalizability of results. In addition, data collection took place at the beginning of the semester, when students had not yet been fully exposed to academic workload, which may partly reduce explanatory value regarding long-term stress experiences. Future research should therefore also consider timing and monitor changes in stress, coping strategies, and well-being over the entire semester.

Another limitation is the sampling method. The sample was obtained through convenience sampling and disproportionately included students from humanities and social sciences, especially psychology and social work. This uneven distribution of study fields may influence results, because students from different academic areas may experience academic stress and use coping strategies differently. For this reason, findings should be interpreted with some caution and their generalizability to the entire university student population may be limited. Future research should therefore aim for more balanced field representation.

A methodological limitation is also the approach to language adaptation of the measurement instruments used. Because official Slovak versions of some scales were not available, the questionnaires were translated by the author using consensus translation. Although content and linguistic equivalence were preserved and comprehensibility was tested on a pilot sample, the translation did not undergo full standardization or back-translation. For this reason, findings should be interpreted with some caution. Future studies should therefore focus on systematic language validation of the tools used in the Slovak context.

In summary, student psychological well-being is closely linked to the level of perceived stress and the quality of coping strategies. Adaptive coping forms directly support subjective well-being, but they do not weaken the negative impact of stress. Gender differences in stress experience and strategy choice confirm the need for a differentiated approach to supporting student mental health. The results of this study therefore contribute to a better understanding of factors affecting university students’ psychological well-being and provide a basis for designing preventive and intervention programs in the academic environment.

Conclusion

The aim of the study was to explore the relationship between perceived stress, coping strategies, and psychological well-being of university students and identify possible gender differences. Results confirmed that higher stress is associated with lower psychological well-being, while adaptive, especially problem-focused coping strategies contribute to higher well-being. Maladaptive coping forms, by contrast, are linked to greater psychological strain. Although the anticipated moderating effect of coping strategies was not confirmed, their significant direct impact on well-being was shown.

Gender differences were also found—women reported higher stress and used emotional and maladaptive strategies more frequently, while men achieved slightly higher psychological well-being. These findings point to the need for systematic support for student mental health, development of adaptive coping skills, and strengthening internal psychological resources. The study therefore contributes to better understanding of factors affecting student psychological well-being in academic settings and provides a basis for future preventive and intervention programs.

Author: Mgr. Sabrina Luščíková

References

American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct (Amended June 1, 2010). American Psychological Association.

Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469–480.

Barbayannis, G., Bandari, M., Zheng, X., Baquerizo, H., Pecor, K. W., & Ming, X. (2022). Academic stress and mental well-being in college students: Correlations, affected groups, and COVID-19. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 886344.

Barret, N., Guillaumée, T., Rimmelé, T., Cortet, M., Mazza, S., Duclos, A., Rode, G., Lilot, M., & Schlatter, S. (2024). Associations of coping and health-related behaviors with medical students’ well-being and performance during objective structured clinical examination. Scientific Reports, 14, Article 11298.

Beiter, R., Nash, R., McCrady, M., Rhoades, D., Linscomb, M., Clarahan, M., & Sammut, S. (2015). The prevalence and correlates of depression, anxiety, and stress in a sample of college students. Journal of Affective Disorders, 173, 90–96.

Berka, P., & Marek, L. (2021). Bachelor’s degree student dropouts: Who tend to stay and who tend to leave? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, Article 101009.

Bersia, M., Charrier, L., Zanaga, G., Gaspar, T., Moreno-Maldonado, C., Grimaldi, P., Koumantakis, E., Dalmasso, P., & Comoretto, R. I. (2024). Well-being among university students in the post-COVID-19 era: A cross-country survey. Scientific Reports, 14, Article 18296.

Carver, C. S. (1997). You want to measure coping but your protocol’s too long: Consider the Brief COPE. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4(1), 92–100.

Carver, C. S., & Connor-Smith, J. (2010). Personality and coping. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 679–704.

Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(2), 267–283. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1990). Principles of self-regulation: Action and emotion. In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 3–52). Guilford Press.

Cheng, H. (2025). Perceived stress and life satisfaction among university students: The mediating and moderating roles of coping strategies and personality traits. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, Article 1690645.

Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24(4), 385–396.

Compas, B. E., Connor-Smith, J. K., Saltzman, H., Thomsen, A. H., & Wadsworth, M. E. (2001). Coping with stress during childhood and adolescence: Problems, progress, and potential in theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 127(1), 87–127.

De La Fuente, A., Cardeñoso, O., Chang, E. C., Lucas, A. G., Li, M., & Chang, O. D. (2022). The role of problem-solving ability, beyond academic motivation, in college students’ psychological adjustment. Current Psychology, 42, 17888–17897.

Deng, Y., Cherian, J., Khan, N. U. N., Kumari, K., & Sial, M. S. (2022). The impact of academic stress on students’ mental health: The mediating role of self-efficacy and social support. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 900697.

Dimunová, L., & Bérešová, A. (2015). Využívanie copingových stratégií zvládania záťaže u sociálnych pracovníkov. Prohuman. Available online: https://prohuman.sk/socialna-praca/vyuzivanie-copingovych-strategii-zvladania-zataze-u-socialnych-pracovnikov

Dyrbye, L. N., Thomas, M. R., & Shanafelt, T. D. (2006). Systematic review of depression, anxiety, and other indicators of psychological distress among U.S. and Canadian medical students. Academic Medicine, 81(4), 354–373.

Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1985). If it changes it must be a process: Study of emotion and coping during three stages of a college examination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 150–170.

Folkman, S., & Moskowitz, J. T. (2004). Coping: Pitfalls and promise. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 745–774.

García-Jiménez, M., Trigo, M. E., Varo, C., Aires-González, M. M., & Cano-García, F. J. (2024). Confirmatory factor analysis and gender invariance of the Coping Strategies Inventory in academic university stress. Clínica y Salud, 35(1), 13–19.

Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524.

Halamová, J., Kanovský, M., Krizova, K., Greškovicová, K., Strnádelová, B., & Baránková, M. (2022). The factor structure and external validity of the COPE 60 inventory in Slovak translation. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 800166.

Huang, P., Lin, Z., Wang, B., & Du, Z. (2025). A mixed methods exploration of the interrelationships among self-compassion, stress management, psychological capital, and life satisfaction in Chinese university students. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, Article e1510987.

Islam, M. A., Barna, S. D., Raihan, H., Khan, M. N. A., & Hossain, M. T. (2025). Depression and anxiety among university students during uncertainty about future careers. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 16, Article 134234.

Klainin-Yobas, P., Vongsirimas, N., Ramirez, D. Q., Sarmiento, J., & Fernandez, Z. (2021). Evaluating the relationships among stress, resilience and psychological well-being among young adults: A structural equation modelling approach. BMC Nursing, 20(1), Article 119.

Kohls, E., Guenthner, L., Baldofski, S., Brock, T., Schuhr, J., & Rummel-Kluge, C. (2023). Two years COVID-19 pandemic: Development of university students’ mental health 2020–2022. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 14, Article 1122256.

Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process. McGraw-Hill.

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer.

Machovcová, K., Škanderová, T., Vengřinová, T., & Zumrová, B. (2024). Becoming a student: Management of transition to higher education among first-generation students. European Educational Research Journal.

Macek, P., Ježek, S., Lacinová, L., Bouša, O., Kvitkovičová, L., Michalčáková, R. N., & Širůček, J. (2016). Emerging adults in the Czech Republic: Views into and across different domains of life. In R. Žukauskienė (Ed.), Emerging adulthood in a European context (pp. 175–201). Routledge.

Majerová, N., & Sokolová, L. (2025). Well-being and academic stress in higher education students: Interview and diary study. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being, 20(1), Article 2602369.

Martincová, J., & Bílá, M. (2023). Pedagogical aspects of the development of academic stress. Cogent Education, 10(1), Article 2237285.

Mayordomo-Rodríguez, T., Meléndez-Moral, J. C., Viguer-Seguí, P., & Sales-Galán, A. (2015). Coping strategies as predictors of well-being in youth adult. Social Indicators Research, 122(2), 479–489.

Molčanová, B. (2018). Vzťah relaxácie a prežívania stresu u vysokoškolských študentov. Prohuman. Available online: https://prohuman.sk/psychologia/vztah-relaxacie-a-prezivania-stresu-u-vysokoskolskych-studentov

Moreno-Montero, E., Ferradás, M. M., & Freire, C. (2024). The roles of psychological capital and coping strategies in predicting well-being among university students. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 21(8), Article 3082.

Müller, C., El-Ansari, K., & El Ansari, W. (2022). Cross-sectional analysis of mental health among university students: Do sex and academic level matter? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(19), Article 12670.

Murray, J. L., & Arnett, J. J. (2018). Emerging adulthood and higher education: A new student development paradigm. Routledge.

Owen, P. J., Kavanagh, S. A., & Lamontagne, A. D. (2025). What can be done to improve the mental health of university students? Identifying determinants of psychological distress at an Australian university. JANZSSA – Journal of the Australian and New Zealand Student Services Association, 33(1), 65–81.

Parová, K. (2025). Vzťah medzi emocionálnou inteligenciou a osobnou pohodou študentov vysokých škôl. Prohuman. Available online: https://prohuman.sk/zdravotnictvo/vztah-medzi-emocionalnou-inteligenciou-a-osobnou-pohodou-studentov-vysokych-skol

Pascoe, M. C., Hetrick, S. E., & Parker, A. G. (2020). The impact of stress on students in secondary school and higher education. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 25(1), 104–112.

Penley, J. A., Tomaka, J., & Wiebe, J. S. (2002). The association of coping to physical and psychological health outcomes: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 25(6), 551–603.

Pérez-Jorge, D., Boutaba-Alehyan, M., González-Contreras, A. I., & Pérez-Pérez, I. (2025). Examining the effects of academic stress on student well-being in higher education. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12, 449.

Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719–727.

Salmela-Aro, K., & Read, S. (2017). Study engagement and burnout profiles among Finnish higher education students. Burnout Research, 7, 21–28.

Schreiber, V. (2001). Lidský stres. Academia.

Sedláková, E. (2021). Akademický stres – přehledová studie. Diskuze v psychologii, 3(1), 1–8.

Solmi, M., Radua, J., Olivola, M., Croce, E., Soardo, L., Salazar de Pablo, G., Shin, J. I., Kirkbride, J. B., Jones, P., Kim, J. H., Kim, J. Y., Carvalho, A. F., Seeman, M. V., Correll, C. U., & Fusar-Poli, P. (2022). Age at onset of mental disorders worldwide: Large-scale meta-analysis of 192 epidemiological studies. Molecular Psychiatry, 27(1), 281–295.

Tayoto, R. A. (2025). The impact of academic workload on students’ mental health and well-being in higher education: A narrative synthesis of the literature. Multidisciplinary International Journal of Research and Development (MIJRD), 4(5), 55–61.

Tecson, C. P., Torion, R. H., Rigos, D. G. I., Torres, J. V., Abergas, A. P., & Alivio, M. R. (2025). Assessing the relationship between work–study balance and academic success: A study of working students. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 8(2), 1–9.

Theodoratou, M., Farmakopoulou, I., Kougioumtzis, G., Kaltsouda, A., Siouti, Z., Sofologi, M., Gkintoni, E., & Tsitsas, G. (2023). Emotion-focused coping, social support and active coping among university students: Gender differences. Journal of Psychology & Clinical Psychiatry, 14(1), 5–9.

Vásquez, M. F., Ochoa, C., Quizhpe, D., & Orellana, P. (2026). Prevalence of anxiety and depression in the university population: Quantitative analysis of associated factors and psychosocial consequences. Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología, 6, Article 2366.

Večeřová-Procházková, A., & Honzák, R. (2009). Stres, eustres a distres. Via Practica, 6(12), 491–495.

Xu, J., & Chai, L. (2025). Navigating academic expectations and social integration: A moderated mediation analysis of cultural adaptation, peer support and well-being among Chinese international students. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, Article 1633773.

Yotsidi, V., Nikolatou, E.-K., Kourkoutas, E., & Kougioumtzis, G. A. (2023). Mental distress and well-being of university students amid COVID-19 pandemic: Findings from an online integrative intervention for psychology trainees. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1171225.